The end is near. You can feel it in the air. Mark Emmert is gone, the board is shrinking, the indiscriminate and pervasive power the organization once held over schools, coaches and athletes is disappearing. The words “NCAA investigation” no longer strike fear in the hearts of those under threat. School management and wealthy donors scoff at the idea of the app from the glacier-like governing body. The pieces have become more powerful than the whole, and as the NCAA attempts to retroactively implement guidelines and restrictions regarding NIL laws, they must be prepared for the legal battle to end all legal battles.
New rules, same old NCAA
New stopped states that “promoting and supporting a specific NCAA institution by providing NIL opportunities to prospective student-athletes and student-athletes at a particular institution” triggers the “definition of a booster”. Under previous regulations, boosters are not permitted to engage in recruiting activities or provide benefits to prospective student-athletes, and the new guidelines explicitly state that “a NIL agreement between a prospective student-athlete and a booster/NIL entity may not be guaranteed. ”
The new guidelines also prohibit compensation for signing a letter of intent or transferring to a school, specifying that “NIL agreements must be based on an independent and case-by-case analysis of the value that each athlete brings. to a NIL agreement” rather than payment for achievements, victories or team membership. School employees are prohibited from facilitating these arrangements for student-athletes.
So If you haven’t read it all, here’s the gist:NOTo funnier deal. The kind of deals we all envisioned when NIL was first announced – sponsorships, hard-earned money from performance on or off the pitch, individual stuff – that’s all there is to it. there is in the future. No more collectives, no more promising 8 million dollar recruits to play for your favorite school, no more creating a specific opportunity for kids at your favorite college to earn money in what is practically a payout budget. At least, that’s what the NCAA says.
So what is the NCAA going to do about it?
By Sports Illustrated, the NCAA knows better than to get tough on the kids — instead, they’ll try to punish schools whose boosters misbehave — but schools may not be so willing to fold and cash in anymore. Collective boosters and CEOs insist that they followed state laws and existing guidelines, and if they have enough money to pay these kids, they certainly have enough to sue or two against a weakened NCAA.
The big target of the app here is violation recruitment. Poor Nico Yamaleava thought he’d graduate from Tennessee in 2027 with a cool 8 mil in his pocket, but that doesn’t seem so likely anymore. All these children who have been promised money to sign somewhere or another are about to receive a severe warning shot. AthleticismYesterday’s article about the new guidelines shows agents and boosters mocking the concept of the NCAA doing anything about it, however – one agent has threatened antitrust lawsuits if the deal is one client was subject to NCAA interference, and another said it was “lovely that the NCAA acted like they were going to clamp down on anything.” Ouch.
This is going to be the fight of a lifetime for an organization that is currently headless and often soulless. While they would only address “particularly egregious” examples of rule-breaking, the definition of a booster and the explicit ban on boosters offering financial opportunities to student-athletes will quickly be called into question. – probably in the form of an antitrust lawsuit.
While existing offerings may not be subject to as much scrutiny, the classes of 2022 and 2023 could be the lucky first and last in these 10 months of big spending — unless, of course, schools and boosters decide to continue to evade recruiting guidelines for future student-athletes and continue giving them what amounts to signing bonuses. And yes, it could really happen. Clearly people are no longer afraid of the NCAA. Whether that’s positive or negative remains to be seen, but it’s looking more and more like the reality we live in.